cuchulainn
February 26, 2003, 08:38 AM
from the Times Picayune:
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1046242517247750.xml
Top gun nut proves other gun nuts right
Wednesday February 26, 2003
James Gill
I can't decide whether I like the AK-47 or the Uzi better, so maybe I'll buy one of each when the ban expires.
That way I'll be well equipped to resist government tyranny, which, so the Second Amendment absolutists say, is what it's all about.
am worried about John Ashcroft, though. Not only is he the biggest gun nut ever to be attorney general, but he has also emerged as the very embodiment of government tyranny.
That would appear to make him his own worst enemy.
I hope he sticks to his guns, however. Without him in charge, perhaps nobody would come knocking on the door in the middle of the night, and I'd have wasted my money.
A gentleman doesn't hunt ducks with an AK-47, and Uzis are practically useless unless you're dealing drugs. Most of the banned guns, according to the NRA, are used for target practice, although there doesn't seem much point in perfecting your aim unless you plan to rub out a few guys sometime.
It says here in the paper that there will be heated debate in Congress over whether the ban on "assault weapons" should be renewed. Maybe so, but the outcome is not hard to predict because the administration will probably be happy to let it die.
President Bush, in his election campaign, said he was in favor of renewal, and Ashcroft, at his confirmation hearings, declared that some restrictions on gun ownership might be reasonable. But nobody was fooled. Bush duly carried crucial rube states, where Al Gore's views on gun control were the kiss of death, and no sooner was Ashcroft confirmed than the NRA called him "a breath of fresh air" and stuck his mug on the cover of its magazine.
I think my AK-47 and Uzi are pretty safe. I'll need them until we get Ashcroft's cold, dead hand off the Bill of Rights.
It's not just Ashcroft, of course. Over at the Pentagon, John Poindexter is beavering away on the ultimate government snoop, a plan to "mine" databases on the entire citizenry. The purported purpose is to find the terrorists among us, but that would require a level of efficiency not generally associated with the federal government.
Congress has assumed oversight and demanded reports before any snooping occurs. But this may not be all that reassuring, Poindexter having been convicted in the Iran-contra affair of lying to Congress, obstructing its investigation and destroying official documents.
Poindexter's convictions were overturned on grounds that he had been granted immunity to testify, but there is no telling what is now going on in the bowels of the Pentagon. The name of Poindexter's baby, Total Information Awareness, is so 1984.
Meanwhile, Ashcroft's Department of Justice has concluded that too much due process survived the Patriot Act, passed by Congress in the panic after 9/11. Although it is now possible for American citizens to be held indefinitely and incommunicado as "enemy combatants," and although constraints on government surveillance have been significantly relaxed, for instance, Ashcroft has concluded the country has not moved far enough in the direction of a police state.
Thus his minions have drafted the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, which would authorize secret arrests and allow an "intent to relinquish" American citizenship to be "inferred from conduct." The government would also be given the go-ahead to collect DNA from anyone suspected of terrorist connections.
Nobody would quarrel with the proposition that extra vigilance is required in times of peril -- the Constitution provides for the suspension of habeas corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it" -- but the Constitution does not provide in any circumstances for the tyranny that Ashcroft would impose.
He may be the best argument for "a well-regulated Militia" in more than 200 years.
James Gill is a staff writer. He can be reached at jgill@timespicayune.com or (504) 826-3318.
©2003 NOLA.com.
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1046242517247750.xml
Top gun nut proves other gun nuts right
Wednesday February 26, 2003
James Gill
I can't decide whether I like the AK-47 or the Uzi better, so maybe I'll buy one of each when the ban expires.
That way I'll be well equipped to resist government tyranny, which, so the Second Amendment absolutists say, is what it's all about.
am worried about John Ashcroft, though. Not only is he the biggest gun nut ever to be attorney general, but he has also emerged as the very embodiment of government tyranny.
That would appear to make him his own worst enemy.
I hope he sticks to his guns, however. Without him in charge, perhaps nobody would come knocking on the door in the middle of the night, and I'd have wasted my money.
A gentleman doesn't hunt ducks with an AK-47, and Uzis are practically useless unless you're dealing drugs. Most of the banned guns, according to the NRA, are used for target practice, although there doesn't seem much point in perfecting your aim unless you plan to rub out a few guys sometime.
It says here in the paper that there will be heated debate in Congress over whether the ban on "assault weapons" should be renewed. Maybe so, but the outcome is not hard to predict because the administration will probably be happy to let it die.
President Bush, in his election campaign, said he was in favor of renewal, and Ashcroft, at his confirmation hearings, declared that some restrictions on gun ownership might be reasonable. But nobody was fooled. Bush duly carried crucial rube states, where Al Gore's views on gun control were the kiss of death, and no sooner was Ashcroft confirmed than the NRA called him "a breath of fresh air" and stuck his mug on the cover of its magazine.
I think my AK-47 and Uzi are pretty safe. I'll need them until we get Ashcroft's cold, dead hand off the Bill of Rights.
It's not just Ashcroft, of course. Over at the Pentagon, John Poindexter is beavering away on the ultimate government snoop, a plan to "mine" databases on the entire citizenry. The purported purpose is to find the terrorists among us, but that would require a level of efficiency not generally associated with the federal government.
Congress has assumed oversight and demanded reports before any snooping occurs. But this may not be all that reassuring, Poindexter having been convicted in the Iran-contra affair of lying to Congress, obstructing its investigation and destroying official documents.
Poindexter's convictions were overturned on grounds that he had been granted immunity to testify, but there is no telling what is now going on in the bowels of the Pentagon. The name of Poindexter's baby, Total Information Awareness, is so 1984.
Meanwhile, Ashcroft's Department of Justice has concluded that too much due process survived the Patriot Act, passed by Congress in the panic after 9/11. Although it is now possible for American citizens to be held indefinitely and incommunicado as "enemy combatants," and although constraints on government surveillance have been significantly relaxed, for instance, Ashcroft has concluded the country has not moved far enough in the direction of a police state.
Thus his minions have drafted the Domestic Security Enhancement Act, which would authorize secret arrests and allow an "intent to relinquish" American citizenship to be "inferred from conduct." The government would also be given the go-ahead to collect DNA from anyone suspected of terrorist connections.
Nobody would quarrel with the proposition that extra vigilance is required in times of peril -- the Constitution provides for the suspension of habeas corpus "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it" -- but the Constitution does not provide in any circumstances for the tyranny that Ashcroft would impose.
He may be the best argument for "a well-regulated Militia" in more than 200 years.
James Gill is a staff writer. He can be reached at jgill@timespicayune.com or (504) 826-3318.
©2003 NOLA.com.